We performed a comparison between AWS GuardDuty and Symantec Cloud Workload Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"It saves time, makes your environment more secure, and improves compliance. PingSafe helps with audits, ensuring that you are following best practices for cloud security. You don't need to be an expert to use it and improve your security."
"It is pretty easy to integrate with this platform. When properly integrated, it monitors end-to-end."
"PingSafe's graph explorer is a valuable tool that lets us visualize all connected services."
"It is very straightforward. It is not complicated. For the information that it provides, it does a pretty good job."
"We've seen a reduction in resources devoted to vulnerability monitoring. Before PingSafe we spent a lot of time monitoring and fixing these issues. PingSafe enabled us to divert more resources to the production environment."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to gain deep visibility into the workloads inside containers."
"The offensive security feature is valuable because it publicly detects the offensive and vulnerable things present in our domain or applications. It checks any applications with public access. Some of the applications give public access to certain files or are present over a particular domain. It detects and lets us know with evidence. That is quite good. It is protecting our infrastructure quite well."
"The most valuable features are the single system for data collection and the alert mechanisms."
"The solution will detect abnormalities in the AWS workload and alert us so that we can monitor and take action."
"Since our environment is cloud based and accessible from the internet, we like the ability to check where the user has logged in from and what kind of API calls that user is doing."
"We use the tool for threat detection. AWS includes AI features as well. AWS GuardDuty gives us reports."
"The solution provides AWS GuardDuty S3 protection, EKS runtime protection, and malware protection."
"We have over 1,000 employees, and we monitor their activity through AWS GuardDuty."
"Deployment is great, and we didn't face any big challenges."
"One of the advantages of cloud services is the ability to use them on demand. There's minimal installation involved; you can check the latest offerings and make new deployments while dismantling the previous ones. This approach keeps you ahead of potential services, showcasing the agility of AWS."
"It will read various logs, diagnose what is wrong, and then alert you."
"The most valuable features in Symantec Cloud Workload Protection are endpoint protection and active directory features. The active directory features in the product are very good, and in terms of security, the most valuable feature in Symantec Cloud Workload Protection is threat defense or threat protection."
"Their search feature could be better."
"One area for improvement could be the internal analysis process, specifically the guidance provided for remediation."
"There's room for improvement in the graphic explorer."
"We are experiencing problems with Cloud Native Security reporting."
"The categorization of the results from the vulnerability assessment could be improved."
"PingSafe's current documentation could be improved to better assist customers during the cluster onboarding process."
"Some of the navigation and some aspects of the portal may be a little bit confusing."
"With Cloud Native Security, we can't selectively enable or disable alerts based on our specific use case."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it will help users to understand multiple options."
"AWS GuardDuty sometimes shows false positives and should have better detection accuracy."
"An improvement would be to have a mobile version where remote workers can log in and monitor and fix issues."
"Improvement-wise, Amazon GuardDuty should have an overall dashboard analytics function so we could see what's in the current environment, and then in addition to that, provide best practices and recommendations, particularly to provide some type of observability, and then figure out the login side of it, based on our current environment, in terms of what we're not monitoring and what we should monitor. The solution should also give us a sample code configuration to implement that added feature or feature request. What I'd like to see in the next release of Amazon GuardDuty are more security analytics, reporting, and monitoring. They should provide recommendations and additional options that answer questions such as "Hey, what can we see in our environment?", "What should we implement within the environment?", What's recommended?" We know that cost will always be associated with that, but Amazon GuardDuty should show us the increased costs or decreased costs if we implement it or don't implement it, and that would be a good feature request, particularly with all products within AWS, just for cloud products in general because there are times features are implemented, but once they're deployed, they don't tell you about costs that would be generated along with those features. After features are deployed, there should a summary of the costs that would be generated, and projected based on current usage, so they would give us the option to figure out how long we're going to use those features and the option to keep those on or turn those off. If more services were like that, a lot more people would use those on the cloud."
"For me, I would say just the presentation of findings, like the dashboards and other stuff, could be improved a bit."
"It would be great if the solution had some automation capabilities."
"Amazon GuardDuty could be better enriched in threat intelligence data."
"AWS GuardDuty needs to be more customer-oriented."
"In the future, we may need to use features that are only available in one of the competing products."
"One area for improvement in Symantec Cloud Workload Protection is integration. Other features that could be improved are defense control and encryption, particularly in the USB. For example, users should be able to control the USB and have the capability of blocking and allowing USB reading and writing. Having a USB encryption feature in Symantec Cloud Workload Protection would also be very useful."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Symantec Cloud Workload Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS GuardDuty is ranked 4th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 20 reviews while Symantec Cloud Workload Protection is ranked 23rd in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 2 reviews. AWS GuardDuty is rated 8.2, while Symantec Cloud Workload Protection is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AWS GuardDuty writes "A stellar threat-detection service that has helped bolster security against malicious threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Cloud Workload Protection writes "Protects cloud-based workloads with antivirus and traffic analysis". AWS GuardDuty is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Wiz and Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform, whereas Symantec Cloud Workload Protection is most compared with . See our AWS GuardDuty vs. Symantec Cloud Workload Protection report.
See our list of best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
